In the absence of partition of property by metes and bounds, either by decree of a court in a partition suit, or by settlement among the co-sharers, possession cannot be handed over to vendee.

Citation

(2009) 10 Supreme Court Cases 654

(BEFORE DALVEER BHANDARI AND DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, JJ.)

Appellant;

GAJARA VISHNU GOSAVI

Versus

Respondents.

PRAKASH NANASAHEB KAMBLE AND OTHERS

 Civil Appeals Nos. 1292-93 of 2002, decided on September 16, 2009

A. Transfer of Property Act, 1882- Ss. 44 and 8- Property having two parts not formally partitioned by metes and bounds, whether vendee of one part can claim possession of the part purchased by him - Of two parts, one occupied by K and M each One part belonging to K purchased by e appellant Dispute regarding possession of said part arose between - appellant and legal heirs of M- Appellant filed civil suit seeking declaration and injunction against legal heirs of M-Concurrent findings of fact that partition had never been given effect to in respect of suit property 

Held, in the absence of partition of property by metes and bounds, either by decree of a court in a partition suit, or by settlement among the co-sharers, possession cannot be handed over to vendee - Property Law Possession - -Appeal dismissed 1963, Ss. 5 & 6Specific Relief Act, bronsonde (Paras 12 and 13)

Kartar Singh v. Harjinder Singh,

 (1990) 3 SCC 517; 

Ramdas v. Sitabai, 

(2009) 7 SCC 444;

 M.V.S. Manikayala Rao v. M. Narasimhaswami, 

AIR 1966 SC 470;

 Sidheshwar Mukherjee v. Bhubneshwar Prasad Narain Singh, 

AIR 1953 SC 487, relied on

B. Constitution of India - Art. 136 Maintainability - finding of fact-No interference by Supreme Court as there was nothing on record to show that it was perverse, being based on no evidence or contrary to the evidence on record - Concurrent 9Appeals dismissedd bud(Para 14)